toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13516 discussions

[Attachment Removed] Re: Re: Document
by MAILER-DAEMON＠leehishammuddin.com.my 24 Oct '04

24 Oct '04

Mail transmission to <kathleen.ng(a)leehishammuddin.com.my> has had attachment "your_document.pif" removed, as attachments of this type are not allowed.

1 0

Audit Logging?
by Stewart, John 24 Oct '04

24 Oct '04

We've got an F740 doing cifs and nfs, with 3 shelves and ~400GB on it. We've got a situation where some critical, sensitive, files were lost. Permissions all look good, so I suspect that one of the people with write access to that directory borked something up (one of them uses Windows briefcases to sync up some files - that could have gone haywire). Anyway, this has brought up the request to do some sort of auditing on this (and perhaps other) directories to record who created/edits/deletes files. Is this possible? With the standard software, or is there some other product we need to purchase? thanks! johnS

2 1

Hi -
by Autolycus 23 Oct '04

23 Oct '04

1 0

signup
by Andrew Cochran 22 Oct '04

22 Oct '04

1 0

RE: raidsize recommendations
by Derek Lai 22 Oct '04

22 Oct '04

The last administrator setup our production database to use 2 X 13 disk raid groups. It worked ok for about 1.5 years. However, I recently was re-organizing and decided to be safer and went to 3 X 9 disk raid groups. Besides taking longer to rebuild, the performance during rebuild was a big issue to me - we were already pounding the disks very hard, with disk utilization going to over 90% utilization frequently. If a disk goes out during peak hours, performance could degrade very substantially and it is just a problem that I do not need. So take that into consideration as well. Derek -----Original Message----- From: Tavis Gustafson [mailto:tavis@hq.newdream.net] Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 12:29 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: raidsize recommendations I usually setup my filers with raidsize=7 having no more than 7 disks per volume. However, I would like create a raidsize=13 volume. The only risk i can glean from NOW is that rebuild time will increase and thus increase the chances of a second drive failure (during rebuild). Has anyone had any real world issues with using volumes of raidsize > 10 thanks, -Tavis

3 2

(no subject)
by Charles Hansen 22 Oct '04

22 Oct '04

I am looking to partition an Overland Neo2000 to be shared by a NetApp(825) and a backup server (ARCserve r11 w/ NDMP license). When you use the LPO (library partitioning option) in the Neo it loses the capability to run in sequential more - each partition can only be used in random access mode. Does anyone know how NDMP/NAS communicates with libraries/changers when directly attached? Do they need to be sequential changing devices are do they also support random access tape changers? Thanks, Charlie

2 1

RE: cifs.request.overdue:info]: CIFS: Overdue CIFS request from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx in state 90, duration 4715 seconds, request type 4, uid 2048, pid 51966, tid 64, mid 59393.
by Phil Dean 22 Oct '04

22 Oct '04

Mark, Way in the past we have had virus scanning issues and worked closely with Trend to fix them all up. The error's we use to get from that side were CIFS: Virus scanner [scanner] completed scan on [file] but original request was not found. We know quite a bit about that side of things, the ip addresses in the xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx are clients workstations, The clients also have virus scanning enabled but another outsourcing company looks after the desktops. We have sent up packet traces and perfstat's today and hope they do find something. One of the ones I looked at in more details, after getting the user to log out and then terminating the session for her on the filer, it was still active, She logged back on and opened three apps, yet in open files under hyena she had outlook pst and xls's where she had not opened outlook or a file within excel, and there were multiple instances of these files roughly 150 or so. Phil Dean Australian Innovative Services Phone: 0407 478 695 Email: Phil.dean(a)aiservices.com.au <mailto:Phil.dean@aiservices.com.au> Web: www.aiservices.com.au ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Australian Innovative Services CONFIDENTIAL The information, files and contents of this email are confidential to Australian Innovative Services and the intended recipient. Forwarding, copying, reading, or downloading of this email is otherwise prohibited ________________________________ From: Muhlestein, Mark [mailto:mark.muhlestein@netapp.com] Sent: Fri 22/10/2004 2:13 PM To: Phil Dean Subject: RE: cifs.request.overdue:info]: CIFS: Overdue CIFS request from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx in state 90, duration 4715 seconds, request type 4, uid 2048, pid 51966, tid 64, mid 59393. Are you running virus scanning? Request type 4 is a close, which is only slow when virus scanning is enabled. Maybe what is happening is that you are copying a huge zip file (for example) and the scan is taking a very long time. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Phil Dean [mailto:Phil.Dean@aiservices.com.au] Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 8:42 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: cifs.request.overdue:info]: CIFS: Overdue CIFS request from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx in state 90, duration 4715 seconds, request type 4, uid 2048, pid 51966, tid 64, mid 59393. We currently have the following error messages being generated on two of our Filers. There is current a Bug ID for a similar error message but with the Request Type being 5 instead of 4. We have an open Sev 1 case with NetApp. Has anyone else experienced this particular issue and if so a suggested procedure to follow. Client issues relating from this problem have been anything from unable to map drives, workstations freezes, slowness to access files/folder/shares. This has been occurring for the past two days and there have been no filer changes done on the systems for many weeks. Hardware Filer head has had diags run on it which was 100% successful. Phil Dean Australian Innovative Services Phone: 0407 478 695 Email: Phil.dean(a)aiservices.com.au <mailto:Phil.dean@aiservices.com.au> Web: www.aiservices.com.au ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Australian Innovative Services CONFIDENTIAL The information, files and contents of this email are confidential to Australian Innovative Services and the intended recipient. Forwarding, copying, reading, or downloading of this email is otherwise prohibited

1 0

cifs.request.overdue:info]: CIFS: Overdue CIFS request from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx in state 90, duration 4715 seconds, request type 4, uid 2048, pid 51966, tid 64, mid 59393.
by Phil Dean 22 Oct '04

22 Oct '04

We currently have the following error messages being generated on two of our Filers. There is current a Bug ID for a similar error message but with the Request Type being 5 instead of 4. We have an open Sev 1 case with NetApp. Has anyone else experienced this particular issue and if so a suggested procedure to follow. Client issues relating from this problem have been anything from unable to map drives, workstations freezes, slowness to access files/folder/shares. This has been occurring for the past two days and there have been no filer changes done on the systems for many weeks. Hardware Filer head has had diags run on it which was 100% successful. Phil Dean Australian Innovative Services Phone: 0407 478 695 Email: Phil.dean(a)aiservices.com.au <mailto:Phil.dean@aiservices.com.au> Web: www.aiservices.com.au ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Australian Innovative Services CONFIDENTIAL The information, files and contents of this email are confidential to Australian Innovative Services and the intended recipient. Forwarding, copying, reading, or downloading of this email is otherwise prohibited

1 0

RE: raidsize recommendations
by Alan Biren 21 Oct '04

21 Oct '04

I have had none, the ideal sizing of RAID Groups is 8-14 drives per group. This will optimize performance in a RAID4 configuration. If you are worried about a double disk failure you can convert the RAID TYPE to RAIDDP if you have the extra disk. In fact it is recommended that with raidsize>14 to use raiddp. -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Tavis Gustafson Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 3:29 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: raidsize recommendations I usually setup my filers with raidsize=7 having no more than 7 disks per volume. However, I would like create a raidsize=13 volume. The only risk i can glean from NOW is that rebuild time will increase and thus increase the chances of a second drive failure (during rebuild). Has anyone had any real world issues with using volumes of raidsize > 10 thanks, -Tavis ***************************************************************************************************** If you have received this email in error please notify the the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclosed the to anyone or make copies. ** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals or malicious content ** ** To find out eSafe(TM) and other Aladdin Security Products, contact AMC Corporation at (212) 620-0700 *****************************************************************************************************

2 1

raidsize recommendations
by Tavis Gustafson 21 Oct '04

21 Oct '04

I usually setup my filers with raidsize=7 having no more than 7 disks per volume. However, I would like create a raidsize=13 volume. The only risk i can glean from NOW is that rebuild time will increase and thus increase the chances of a second drive failure (during rebuild). Has anyone had any real world issues with using volumes of raidsize > 10 thanks, -Tavis

3 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters